U.S. Policy

To promote stability and other U.S. interests, Washington must reshape its approach to this increasingly complex staging ground for global competition.

A more modest approach is warranted, one that emphasizes core interests, acknowledges the limitations of U.S. leverage, and avoids going too far with funding cuts and sanctions.

Washington needs to revisit its traditional reluctance to share decisionmaking with European partners—who in turn need to reconsider their traditional discomfort over burden sharing.

After twenty years of investing in unique and powerful counterterrorism tools, the U.S. government now risks falling behind the times by allowing these tools to direct its strategy.

Simply waiting for Russia to decline has not prevented the Kremlin's aggressive and destabilizing behavior in various regions, and may even have encouraged it.

American withdrawal would doom efforts against the Islamic State, undermine confidence in Baghdad, exacerbate Iraq's economic crisis, and deliver the country completely to Tehran.

By adjusting carrier rotations, ISR capabilities, headquarters locations, and other key aspects of its posture, the Biden administration can contribute to regional security and self-sufficiency while still shifting toward great-power competition.

The shift away from a U.S.-led military posture will require that Washington repair its damaged credibility with allies abroad. A major task at home will be disentangling counterterrorism budgets from the military budgets on which they have long been grafted.

Washington has prioritized counterterrorism for years and is only now shifting to great-power competition, but Moscow has never lost sight of geopolitics, and its actions in the region should be seen through that lens.